t byfield on Sun, 2 May 1999 09:06:26 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> (fwd) Kosovo: A Letter By An American Serviceman |
<http://search.dejanews.com/msgid.xp?MID=%3c7g34qa$lp4$1@news.missouri.edu%3e> Subject: Kosovo : A Letter By An American Serviceman Author: Agent Smiley <smiley_777@hotmail.com> Date: 1999/04/27 Forum: misc.activism.progressive Posted on: 1999/04/27 Message-ID: <7g34qa$lp4$1@news.missouri.edu> Distribution: usa (27 Apr 1999 01:44:42 GMT) Activist Mailing List - http://get.to/activist Kosovo : A Letter By An American Serviceman *I heard in the news yesterday that 55% of Americans who were polled support sending ground troops into Kosovo. Well, I'm a ground troop and I'm willing to go. My only hope is that this 55% of Americans are prepared to deal with the possibility they'll have to look my widow in the eye and provide a plausible explanation as to just what I died for. Good luck on getting her to buy into any of the current rhetoric on why America has no choice but to involve itself in a Serbian Civil war. *I'm a Gulf War vet. In spite of all the B.S. about standing up for Kuwaiti sovereignty we all know what that conflict was about - it was about oil and it's importance as the life blood of the modern world economy. The rank and file who fought that war all understood this and didn't have a problem with it. Fighting to preserve free- market access to oil may lack a certain nobility, but it was clearly in the national interest. Had it come to that, I think my widow would have understood there was some value in her loss. *I've served with U.N. peacekeepers in Former Yugoslavia. At the time, the nation seemed to believe the region was of only minor importance to our larger national interest. Consequently, our involvement was fairly low risk. Had it come to that, I think my widow would have understood that when you take a calculated risk like this, a small number of people are going to have the bad luck to be killed. *Now the nation wants to send it's ground troops off to Kosovo. In the event I go and in the event I'm killed, it's going to be a pretty hard sell to convince my widow that her husband's life wasn't needlessly squandered by a nation that decided to head down the road of good intentions with both its eyes closed. *The current situation in Serbia/Kosovo is a civil war; the inevitable result of two groups of people who have chosen to treat each other badly over the last several hundred years. Is it sad? It certainly is. The current situation in Kosovo offends our sense of humanity. It sparks that outraged voice that lives inside of each of us, both because we're human beings and Americans, that asks "can't we do something to stop this?" The pictures of suffering Kosovo refugees are gut wrenching to anyone with a shred of conscience - As will be the pictures of widows and small children standing over flag draped coffins in American cemeteries. *The talking heads encouraging our intervention in Kosovo all allude (albeit very briefly) to the fact there will be American casualties. How many casualties? No one seems to want to go into that. What the 55% should be asking themselves right about now is very simple - as bad as the situation is in Kosovo, how many dead Americans is it worth? In even simpler terms - how many American widows and orphans are you prepared to try to justify our involvement in a Balkan ground war to? *Is Milosevic a war criminal? Maybe. Was General Sherman a war criminal when he led his Army through Georgia in our own civil war? I'm sure a lot of Georgians at the time felt he was. In our civil war both the North and the South had some legitimate concerns and grievances. In the Serbian civil war both the Serbs and the Muslims have some legitimate concerns and grievances. This is usually the way it goes in a civil war and it is why they tend to be such quagmires. The necessity of our involvement in this quagmire will raise a few questions in the minds of the widows. *I'm going to shift gears a little and try to provide a little insight into the minds of the "rank and file" as it applies to the situation in Kosovo. I joke with my wife about how I'm currently in the unenviable position of having too many people with too much to gain by seeing me dead. My death allows Bill Clinton to distract the nation from his peccadilloes and show international leadership. It allows Milosevic to show Serbians how he has slain the enemy. *It improves Ted Turner's ratings at CNN. It gives Congressional Democrats the opportunity to support their President. It gives Congressional Republicans the opportunity to show they're even more "hawkish" than the Democrats. It even gives my wife a $200,000 GI life insurance pay-off. Is there anyone out there in a position of authority who doesn't have something to gain by seeing me dead? If there is, I wish they'd hurry up and speak out. Otherwise I may find it necessary to increase the benefits of my life insurance policy! *I think it's kind of funny, but she doesn't seem to see the humor in it. This probably has something to do with the worry associated with having seen me off to two combat zones in last ten years. Nevertheless, the rampant behavioral stupidity she has seen in this White House and Congress (and the media's frenzied response to it all) over the last couple of years has left her cynical enough to see a little truth behind my attempt at humor (all except for that life insurance part!). *If I thought for a minute that fighting a ground war in Kosovo was going to end the region's problems I suppose I'd be all in favor of going off to do so. I suspect my prospective widow would be in favor as well. This just begs the question; does anyone really believe we can make everything all better in Kosovo by fighting a ground war there? *Unfortunately, the odds seem to favor an outcome that, at best, will be the political equivalent of willingly entering into a life-long bad marriage in which divorce won't be an option. After all, how many years has it been since we sent the troops off for the one-year mission in Bosnia? *None of this is to say we don't have a national interest in the region. Rather, it is intended to raise the question; "how many dead Americans is this worth?" I can't help but think that once the dust has all settled and the dead are all buried, we could have accomplish as much, or more, by simply using foreign aid to bribe surrounding nations in the region to stay the hell out of another country's civil war. *We've been getting a lot of mileage out of our military since the cold war ended. Through a combination of good training, superior equipment, thoughtful planning, and shear dumb luck; we've been able to do this with very few causalities. I think this has made it easy for the 55% to say they're in favor of committing ground troops to Kosovo. I also think it is very naive of them to believe that luck will hold in ground combat in Kosovo. A study of the German Army's experiences in Yugoslavia during WWII would be illustrative of how likely we are to fight a ground war in the Balkans with minimal causalities. Another point to consider is the simple matter of the will to win. I have a hunch that when the body bags start coming home, we'll discover the Serbians have a much stronger will to hold on to Kosovo than we have to assure its autonomy. *I've always kind of thought of the military as the national chain saw: a very efficient tool when used correctly, but use it carelessly and you'll end up ripping your own leg off. Since the cold war ended, I have to wonder if we haven't been guilty of using the national chain saw somewhat recklessly. I would guess we've militarily intervened in the affairs of other countries as many times in the past ten years as we did in the 90 years that preceded. These interventions have apparently numbed the 55% to the point that they're no longer capable of seriously considering the possibility of an American military intervention running amok. *We've reached a point where 55% of the American public seems to think it is O.K. to put the military into harm's way without serious consideration of the risks involved (very great in this case) relative to the national interest (highly debatable in this case). It's enough to get this old sergeant wondering if they really feel much of a personal stake in the whole thing. *Hell, we're all volunteers these days; we knew the risks going into it didn't we? So what have we got to bitch about if we're sent off to die on some questionable foreign policy intervention? Sure we know the risk when we "sign on the dotted line", but something about this view of the military never the less makes me very nervous. I'd hate to think the American public sees us as little more than contracted mercenaries whose fate has little bearing on the larger affairs of the republic. *Still, I have to wonder if, on some level, this isn't precisely the perception that exists. Would the 55% feel the same way if we were sending conscripted draftees off to Kosovo? Would the 55% be quite so happy to send me off to die in pursuit of a highly dubious foreign policy objective if I were taking their conscripted sons, daughters, husbands, and wives with me? I doubt it. Here is the point, if it matters enough to the national interest to send volunteers off to die, it should also matter enough to send conscripts as well. *Otherwise, our all volunteer force has become nothing but mercenaries. Sadly, I suspect this has become the case. Still, I'd hate to see the 55% become too complacent in how they support the use of their mercenaries. The military is having a hard time of meeting its recruiting goals these days. The available pool of young people eligible for military service is growing smaller each year. Could today's 55%'er be tomorrow's "hell no we won't go" protester? Wouldn't surprise me a bit, if not in Kosovo, then certainly in some future foreign policy adventure. After all, the war in Vietnam didn't take long before it became necessary to suck in increasingly large numbers of draftees to support it. Let's go back and ask those widows if their loved ones died for a good cause. *But I digress. Hopefully the time I've spent wandering away from the original topic has provided those of you who number yourselves among the 55% an opportunity to think. Hopefully, you've been thinking about just what explanation you're going to provide all those widows when they ask, "what exactly did my husband die for?" Good luck, because when it comes time to talk to this old sergeant's widow you're going to have a tough sell on your hands. =========================================== )From Defending America http://www.hackworth.com ##################################################### Recall the face of the poorest and most helpless person you have seen and ask yourself if the next step you contemplate is going to be of any use to that person. - Mahatma Gandhi <...> --- # distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@desk.nl and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: nettime-owner@desk.nl